• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

server ssd (2012r2) recommendation

S

Shumph

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 29, 2004
Messages
401
I have a server that I want to boot with ssd (or other 2.5 drive). All data will be on a raid 10 array so I only really need it for boot.

thinking somewhere in the 512 range. I have 2 2.5 slots so I was thinking mirrored but I am open to suggestions. This will be a production server.

So what would be a good ssd for this scenario? Thanks!
 
so all it is used is for boot? No IO intensive stuff, no programs, no real work besides boot?


If thats the case i would go with two EVOs in RAID 1. The 512 or whatever size version is now competitive in pricing and it has good boot speeds. You don't need mix work load, steady state, or anything like that so an EVO will do fine and since its cheaper it allows you to have extra budget for a RAID 1 for redundancy and up time.
 
SomeGuy133 said:
so all it is used is for boot? No IO intensive stuff, no programs, no real work besides boot?


If thats the case i would go with two EVOs in RAID 1. The 512 or whatever size version is now competitive in pricing and it has good boot speeds. You don't need mix work load, steady state, or anything like that so an EVO will do fine and since its cheaper it allows you to have extra budget for a RAID 1 for redundancy and up time.
Click to expand...

Yeah my plan is only for boot/os stuff. I will have sql server and hyperv on a raid 10 array that is hdd based. I was thinking normal consumer ssd's would be OK but wanted some other opinions.
 
Avoid the EVOs, they have lower TBW than many other drives. Just go for the Samsung 850 Pro or Micron M600 (much higher TBW so I'd go for this one).
 
diizzy said:
Avoid the EVOs, they have lower TBW than many other drives. Just go for the Samsung 850 Pro or Micron M600 (much higher TBW so I'd go for this one).
Click to expand...

Brian_B said:
If your gonna RAID 1 them, go for the cheapest thing you can get.
Click to expand...

thats why i said EVO. If it wasn't a RAID 1 I wouldnt recommend the EVO and he said OS only so there should be very little actual writes going on assuming set up is correct. So TBW is mostly irrelevant in that case.
 
diizzy said:
I'm sure reliability isn't however which TBW largely shows ;-)
Click to expand...

EVOs in a raid 1 will be just fine. If you can show me any documentation showing those dropping like flies i would be interested but I have never heard any report of those drives being inherently unreliable and I am someone who loathes TLC. (i make that quite clear on the forum)
 
I for sure wouldn't do EVOs, if you want cheap I'd much rather go for the Crucial MX200s.

"The SSD 850 EVO supports Total Bytes Written (TBW) of 75TBW for the 120/250GB drives and 150TBW for the 500GB/1TB capacities. This is up from 44TBW in the 840 EVO, a direct benefit of the move to 3D V‐NAND Flash which allows for greater endurance."
http://www.storagereview.com/samsung_ssd_850_evo_ssd_review

"The 500GB capacity point MX200 we are testing today has an endurance rating of 160 TBW. That's huge, in fact, that's even better than Samsung's 3D-NAND powered 850 EVO." (250 is half)
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7079/crucial-mx200-500gb-ssd-review/index.html

"For 128GB, it is rated for 100TB total bytes written and the 256GB drive is rated for 200TB TBW. The 512GB is rated for 300TB TBW and finally, the 1TB drive is rated for up to 400TB TBW."
http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/micron-m600-ssd-review-256gb1tb/

They aren't more expensive than the 850 Pro's just time I check so I guess it boils down to how important uptime and your data is.
 
diizzy said:
I for sure wouldn't do EVOs, if you want cheap I'd much rather go for the Crucial MX200s.

"The SSD 850 EVO supports Total Bytes Written (TBW) of 75TBW for the 120/250GB drives and 150TBW for the 500GB/1TB capacities. This is up from 44TBW in the 840 EVO, a direct benefit of the move to 3D V‐NAND Flash which allows for greater endurance."
http://www.storagereview.com/samsung_ssd_850_evo_ssd_review

"The 500GB capacity point MX200 we are testing today has an endurance rating of 160 TBW. That's huge, in fact, that's even better than Samsung's 3D-NAND powered 850 EVO." (250 is half)
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7079/crucial-mx200-500gb-ssd-review/index.html

"For 128GB, it is rated for 100TB total bytes written and the 256GB drive is rated for 200TB TBW. The 512GB is rated for 300TB TBW and finally, the 1TB drive is rated for up to 400TB TBW."
http://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/micron-m600-ssd-review-256gb1tb/

They aren't more expensive than the 850 Pro's just time I check so I guess it boils down to how important uptime and your data is.
Click to expand...


nice apples to oranges in comparing 256GB to 500GB in TBW.

Back to the point he was considering 500GB range drive so 150 TBW compared to 160 TBW is not note worthy

Additionally, TBW is really a warranty and not an actual write limit. Also he is using it as a boot with no programs running off it so 150 TBW will be near impossible for him to use in any legitimate amount of time. I myself who uses writes out the ass would take a few years to use 150 TBW. I average 100-150 GB per day or so

Also if you want to consider the 256GB range the EVO IIRC is considerable faster than the MX200. But those are "benchmarks" so eh.

Again he wanted RAID 1 so up time and reliability of a drive is even less meaningful becuase you are in RAID 1. If this was a single drive i would never recommend an EVO in this use case but for RAID 1 and only an OS drive with no added programs write endurance DOES NOT MATTER. There is no reason to buy a slower drive or a more expensive drive. or a combination of both. It would be wasteful.
 
Last edited:
Did you miss the Micron which is aimed for entry businesses?
As I said, it all depends on how much your data is worth. If you want to gamble go for the EVO drives, if not look for something else. There's a reason companies like Netflix goes for Crucial/Micron SSDs even if they aren't looking for data center drives for instance.
//Danne
 
Thanks for the info guys. gives me something to think about, like should I be using ssd's here anyway :D
 
diizzy said:
Did you miss the Micron which is aimed for entry businesses?
As I said, it all depends on how much your data is worth. If you want to gamble go for the EVO drives, if not look for something else. There's a reason companies like Netflix goes for Crucial/Micron SSDs even if they aren't looking for data center drives for instance.
//Danne
Click to expand...

no but did you miss how nothing is mission critical and its near impossible to have 2 EVOs go bad at the exact same time.

There is 0 important data going on these drives and uptime is all that matters and in RAID 1 it is nearly impossible to loose both drives at the exact same time. So why throw money away?

$310 for RAID 1 EVOs
vs
$215 for single M600
vs
$430 fpr RAID 1 M600

In his use case I rather save 120 bucks unless you can provide some documentation showing these EVOs to be inherently unreliable. or spend 95 more dollars for a RAID 1 vs single drive for perfect uptime.

So any argument used about importance of data is moot because it is merely an OS drive with nothing on it.....is that really that hard to comprehend? How many times does OP have to repeat that and I have to repeat what the OP said for you to get it? Only thing that matters is uptime and please provide real factual data that these EVOs are utter trash and will drop like flies....waiting.....
 
Last edited:
Except that others seems to share my view and you even have hard data from the manufactorer ;-)
Oh well, buy EVOs if you want. It's not my issue when they go down...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top